In a significant ruling, ITAT Delhi upholds deletion of cash addition in DCIT vs. Atul Gupta case for AY 2017-18 after demonetization. Get the full order details here
ITAT quashes penalty order under section 271D as it was time-barred. Detailed analysis of Ram Kishan Verma Vs Additional CIT (ITAT Jaipur) case.
ITAT Ahmedabad deleted the addition towards unexplained cash credit as AO failed to conduct independent inquiry and addition was made merely for the reason that there was minor difference in amount of cash deposited vis-à-vis amount of demand draft and amount of invoice.
ITAT Mumbai held that as the assessee should be aware of the exact charge for which the penalty proceeding has been initiated, non-striking on the irrelevant limb under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act vitiates the entire penalty proceedings.
ITAT Bangalore held that initiation of proceedings against the person other than the searched person under section 148, instead of section 153C, of the Income Tax Act is without any jurisdiction and hence held liable to be set aside.
ITAT Mumbai order in DCIT vs Brandon & Co. (P) Ltd.: Set-off of carry-forward loss of capital gains in demerger. Analysis and conclusions provided.
Explore the JMD Corporation vs ITO case where ITAT Mumbai restricts profit element of purchases at 4%, examining allegations of bogus purchases for A.Y. 2011-12.
ITAT Bangalore held that no computation of fee u/s. 234E of the Act for delayed filing of return of TDS while processing a return of TDS u/s. 234E of the Act could have been made for tax deducted at source for the assessment years prior to 1.6.2015.
ITAT Mumbai held that the finance costs having direct nexus with the business should be allowed as a deduction under section 36(1)(iii) of the Income Tax Act.
ITAT Mumbai held that the rates on which power is available through Indian Energy Exchange cannot be applied, because these are not the rates to the consumers but rates to the DISCOMs. Accordingly, transfer pricing adjustment deleted.
